Did Nicole Kidman really deserved her Oscar? - The Hours (2003) Discussion

[–] decrd1986 16 years ago

honestly?

i dont think she deserved the oscar.
she was great in the hours, but i didn't feel the character or Nicole
did a SMASHING, performance? sorry. :)

I mean ive seen some actresses who are AMAZING, and not even get nominated.
i think hollywood is very much politics, along with talent.
Nicole is talented, but Oscar worthy for this peice?? hmmm... i dont know about that one.

reply

[–] karaladh 11 years ago

I don't know if you're familiar with Liv Ullmann and Juliette Binoche? I consider them to be the greatest actresses of all time, for they have worked with the most gifted directors and have often portrayed impossibly complex female characters in such a way that it actually takes time for the viewer to fully grasp the essence and depth of the character. Any decent actress can play a role convincingly enough, but very few actresses can actually focus on their character's soul.

I don't think Nicole is as great an actress as Liv Ullmann, but I think her performance in The Hours was of the same caliber.

You're not a vegetarian, are you? I've never met a vegetarian I liked.

reply

[–] filmbuff87 16 years ago

she deserved it. no doubt.

Joss Whedon's "Dollhouse" - FRI 9/8c

reply

[–] Harold_Robbins 16 years ago

Kidman was very good - she wasn't the first actress to win an Oscar for a role and performance that downplayed her good looks, but personally I'd have given the nomination (and probably the win) to Meryl Streep (who mistakenly received a "Featured Actress" nomination instead for the wretched ADAPTATION).

"Somewhere along the line the world has lost all of its standards and all of its taste."

reply

[–] davidjamesbellamy 16 years ago

She was good but I thought she was better in Moulin Rouge!

To me, Julianne Moore deserved it for Far From Heaven.

reply

[–] MilkWithHoney 16 years ago

1. She was great in the movie.

2. Did she deserve the oscar, I dont think so.

3. I think she REALLY did win because she deserved it for Moulin Rouge but they gave it to Halle Berry to prove they weren't racist.

Heath Ledger Come Back,
This isn't funny at all.

reply

[–] MickBarr-1 16 years ago

Because there could be no other explanation for Halle Berry winning an Oscar, right? It's not as if she gave a great performance or anything. Geez

reply

[–] bridgetjones12002 16 years ago

Because there could be no other explanation for Halle Berry winning an Oscar, right?

Halle Berry was magnificent and I think deserved the Oscar over Nicole Kidman for Moulin Rouge.

But I thought Nicole Kidman deserved her Oscar for The Hours. She was incredible.

reply

[–] smijatov89 16 years ago

I thought that Nicole Kidman was the best that year, for The Hours.
Julianne Moore for Far From Heaven was pretty close - but Nicole had the edge. And she won, anyway. Plus, it's not like she won ONLY the Oscar - she got the BAFTA and the Golden Globe. All the major awards, except of the SAG which went to Zellweger (random)!

___________________________________
And the Oscar goes to... by a nose, NICOLE KIDMAN!

reply

[–] west3210 16 years ago

I love Nicole but hey, Halle did an amazing job. Nicole got much more attention that year but Halle nailed it.

Imagine the world where people speak only about things they know. Imagine that SILENCE...

reply

[–] DenzelFishburne 16 years ago

Halle Berry is just a good actress -black or white. Angela Bassett, Kimberly Elise, Lynn whitfield, Thandie Newton, Alfre Woodard, and Cicely Tyson are all better actresses, however do not possess her beauty but should all possess more acting ability awards

reply

[–] MariaLoathesDTWig 16 years ago

Halle's performance wasn't oscar worthy!!!All the other actresses(especially Nicole Kidman and Sissy Spacek) were better than her that year!

reply

[–] DenzelFishburne 16 years ago

also, I dont know if you saw Dogville, but Nicole gave an amazingly powerful performance in that

reply

[–] MariaLoathesDTWig 16 years ago

I think Nicole's best performance will always remain Susanne Stone Maretto in Gus Van Sandt's TO DIE FOR(1995).

reply

[–] DenzelFishburne 16 years ago

I will be on the lookout for this one- Thanks!

reply

[–] hengedrita 15 years ago

No Julianne Moore in Far from heaven should have won. And Meryl should have had a double nod with The Hours and Adaptation

FYC: Emily Watson in Within the Whirlwind and Tilda Swinton in Julia

reply

[–] J_R_Cash 15 years ago

I haven't seen all of Nicole's movies, so it's not like I am well versed in her movie career. With that being said, I thought she did a FANTASTIC job in this movie, and am glad that she won an Oscar for this role. I think that in all the roles she has had over the years, she probably deserved the Oscar for this role alone. Especially if you compare this role to movies like Bewitched and The Stepford Wives, but then, that's not really fair to compare it to those wretched movies.

hubpages.com/profile/TheSablirab
davidorth.forumco.com/default.asp

reply

[–] AccidntlTourist 12 years ago

"Halle Berry is just a good actress -black or white. Angela Bassett, Kimberly Elise, Lynn whitfield, Thandie Newton, Alfre Woodard, and Cicely Tyson are all better actresses, however do not possess her beauty but should all possess more acting ability awards" - DF

Thank you, I was trying to find a way to say it without sounding mean - and I think that hits it just right.

I like Halle in film, but there is "good" and then there is phenomenal and when we are talking Oscar - we "should" be looking for the best of the best - in terms of acting performance.

reply

[–] imdbaddict 14 years ago

There's no way she deserved it.
I love this film but for me she's the one weak link. All that awful fake nose stripey tights ugly acting - terrible. It's like a joke.
Let's make myself look really unbeautiful (I know it's not a word) and then everyone will think 'she's a real actor.'
My arse.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] neof 14 years ago

Yes totally. I love the film and she was great in it, but I think she should have one the previous year for Moulin Rouge. Halle Berry isn't an actress! She shouldn't even have been nominated let alone win a best actress award - something that the great actresses like Deborah Kerr were never given.

Im not racist but they definitely were giving them to the black movie stars that year - and I say movie stars, not actors/actresses.

Julianne Moore probably should have won that year for Far From Heaven in which she was absolutely brilliant IMO.

reply

[–] YEAHxthree 12 years ago

u r racist.

reply

[–] otims 16 years ago

No. She doesn't even deserve her career.

reply

[–] wisectw2 16 years ago

I think she deserved the Oscar that year - but she Julianne Moore had won I wouldn't feel bad. Regarding Moulin Rouge - I think Sissy Spacek had the best performance...with Nicole right after.
She also should have been nominated for Birth and Margot at the wedding. She wouldn't win...but up to now she should already have 5 noms ( including To die for) and 1 won for The hours.

reply

[–] scruppyandthecoolcats 16 years ago

No, not considering the other actresses that year. Salma Hayek in "Frida", Meryl Streep in "The Hours." Catherine Zeta Jones and Renee Zelweger "Chicago." Julianna Moore in "Far from Heaven." Julianne Moore or Meryl Streep should have won it. It was a good year for women.

reply

[–] Two-Die-For 13 years ago

I really think that she truly deserved an Oscar for her brilliant performance in "The Hours." The train station scene blew me away. Her portrayal of Virginia Woof was so rarely exquisite that I thought she stood out from the rest of the nominees that year. That being said, I think Julianne Moore was excellent in "Far From Heaven", too.

** I also thought that Nicole should have got her 1st Oscar for "Moulin Rouge" in the previous year. She was totally robbed by the Academy, who wanted to prove how versatile they were to give the award to the African-American Halle Berry (I am NOT a racist though). Also, she should have been nominated for her role in "To Die For". She got her a Golden Globe but then the Academy totally ignored it. What a pity !

reply

[–] agathoular8 11 years ago

A few minutes ago i saw a video(funart i think)(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r39_k_uHCEI)
on you tube and i was socked!!Nicole kidman is amazing.Also Meryl Streep she doesn't need an oscar for that movie because everyone know how good she is(she has 20 nomination??)IS that movie so depressing as it seems??

reply

[–] Marlene_Misses_DWE 15 years ago

Yes, she absolutely deserved the Oscar. The way she conveyed the pain and the troubles of that character was very authentic and very sublime. This film made her an absolute superstar for me.

reply

[–] nugrahane2 13 years ago

Exactly!!

Nicole's portrayal of Wool's pain was so subtle and yet dramatic, which is very very hard to pull off.

Also, Kidman gave the best performance of the year in "The Others". She was perfect in it.

reply

[–] zsigomiklos 15 years ago

I think that Virginia Wolf and Nicole Kidman got the Oscar jointly. Being a tragic character like Virginia, who actually committed the suicide, makes it easier to be focused on her character.

Otherwise I think Nicole was pretty good. But is it really worth comparing other actresses who might have deserved the Oscar more? I don't think so. However, I thought Julianne Moore was smashing! But unfortunately she had a really boring role...

reply

[–] LollyMM 15 years ago

No she didn't. I think she's a terrible, massively overrated actress. I also think she looked better with the nose. If any-one deserved an Oscar for performances in this film it was Julianne Moore & Meryl Streep.

I love this film so much. The only blip for me was Kidman and Toni Collette (a brilliant actress but horribly miscast in this role). Even the music is amazing.

reply

[–] A_Fistful_of_Pennies 15 years ago

No, but to be fair, it was a weak year for nominees (Diane Lane for Unfaithful, really?).

I honestly think she won because of the nose. Seriously.

reply

[–] caroms2051 13 years ago

You have to admit it that this was a fantastic ensemble cast! Each and everyone of the major characters, Kidman, Streep, Julianne Moore, AB Janney, Clair Danes, Toni Colette, Jeff Daniels and certainly, Ed Harris, could have been nominated for an Oscar.

So, if one of the above had to actually win 'the Oscar,' why not Nicole Kidman: she had to endure the fake-nosed make up. In fact, this role partially made up for her flip and smirky performance, "The Human Stain," so all the more reason for her to have won.

Meryl Streep? Well how many Oscars has she already won? She has a bunch of them, and she probably has some of them stashed in the hall closet behind the Christmas wrapping paper or in the garage or someplace like that. She doesn't need any more.

Don't know why you knocked Toni Collette. She was super! And she really shows knows how to flash her 'its whats-upfront-that-counts' attributes! (Guess you can credit the movie's costume designer for that). She was great! And Claire Danes was fantastic, too.

(So were Jeff Daniels and Ed Harris. All of these actors make such convincing 'gays,' you just gotta wonder.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] caroms2051 13 years ago

Meryl is spectacular, there is no other way to put it. I just re-watched 1979's 'Manhattan,' for the upteenth time, and was struck at how much her character is exactly in almost every detail, just like "Clarissa."

Eerie. Somwhere there must be a 'picture of Dorian Gray,' with Meryl Streep filling in for Dorian, bcz she seems not to have aged at all. Pact with the devil?

reply